Jump to content




Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.

Photo

Passenger Miles Per Train Mile Metric


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#21 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 19 December 2015 - 12:09 AM

Another thing I found interesting is the end result of Texas service. There were two routes from Chicago to Texas. One was called the Inter-American which went via St. Louis and served Austin and San Antonio. The other was called the Lone Star which went via Kansas City, Wichita, and Oklahoma City and served Houston. Both trains stopped at both Dallas and Ft. Worth.

 

October 1978 Amtrak timetable: http://www.timetable...81029&item=0042

 

According to the PM/TM scores, the Lone Star had a 113 while the Inter-American had a 57. In the 1979 report, both the Lone Star and the Inter-American were recommended to be discontinued. This would have meant there would be no service to Texas from Chicago, Dallas would have no service at all, and Houston and San Antonio would only be served by the Sunset Limited. I think most if not all of us are glad that recommendation didn't happen.

 

The Lone Star ended in 1979 (https://en.wikipedia...r_(Amtrak_train)) while the Inter-American eventually became the Texas Eagle we know today (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-American_(train)). Originally Amtrak ran the Inter-American with through cars to Houston but once the TE was born (1981) they were removed. Essentially the Texas Eagle was essentially choosing one of two routes to Texas like choosing between the Empire Builder and North Coast Hiawatha for a route to Seattle.

 

For a short time there was a Houston branch from Dallas (https://en.wikipedia...iki/Texas_Eagle). Now there is no Dallas-Houston service at all which I think would be a good route. Now Amtrak is at the mercy of Texas because of PRIIA if they ever want to start the branch again (or run a 750 mile train that happens to pass both cities).

 

If you had just gone by PM/TM, the Lone Star should have been kept while the Inter-American should've been the train cut. A compromise could have been to have the Texas train go CHI-STL-KCY-Oklahoma City-Dallas/Ft. Worth with a split with one branch to Houston and one to San Antonio/Austin. The STL/KCY branch would also serve as a route lost when they cut the National Limited.  If I had to choose, I'd probably have gone with Houston over San Antonio/Austin. Little Rock would've lost service but when the Lone Star was discontinued Wichita and Oklahoma City both lost service. The whole state of Oklahoma didn't get back service until 1999. So which state do you cut off (even though  I know most of you would say neither)?

 

One outside the box solution could've been to keep the Inter-American and merge the Lone Star with the National Limited and run that train New York-Dallas/Houston via STL and KCY. That would've given direct NY to Texas service. Or you could reroute the Lone Star via STL as I suggested and then merge the Inter-American with the National Limited (New York-Dallas/San Antonio via STL and Little Rock). Either way, you have one train from CHI to Texas and one train from New York to Texas. Perhaps that would've given them a reason to keep the National Limited although that would have admittedly been a long shot. The Floridian was probably out as well. At that time, the only remaining service to Florida was via the NEC as the Sunset Limited terminated at NOL back then. Of course, that's the case now. 

 

The 1979 report has also suggested merging the Southwest Limited (now SWC) and San Francisco Zephyr (now CZ) into one train going CHI-KCY-DEN and then splitting at Ogden, Utah. They had also recommended cutting the Pioneer which then was Salt Lake City to Seattle via Portland although that train wasn't cut until 1997. I probably run separate SWC and CZ and run the Pioneer off the CZ at SLC, cancelling both the Empire Builder and the North Coast Hiawatha and running a new train only between CHI and MSP. 


Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Soon: Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#22 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,261 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 19 December 2015 - 08:42 PM

It's pretty clear that the Lone Star route (Kansas City & Houston) was better than the Inter-American route, by both speed and population numbers (St. Louis aside). The current route through Arkansas is slow, and impressive in its lack of online population.

I really don't know why the Lone Star got cut despite having much better PM/TM than the Inter-American. It would be interesting to see the political history there.

Philly Amtrak Fan presents what would have been the most sensible route: "CHI-STL-KCY-Oklahoma City-Dallas/Ft. Worth with a split with one branch to Houston and one to San Antonio/Austin".

I wonder what they were thinking in 1979. It still seems like they made a deliberate effort in 1979 to kill Amtrak by slashing *stronger* routes and keeping *weaker* routes
--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#23 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 19 December 2015 - 10:03 PM

It's pretty clear that the Lone Star route (Kansas City & Houston) was better than the Inter-American route, by both speed and population numbers (St. Louis aside). The current route through Arkansas is slow, and impressive in its lack of online population.

I really don't know why the Lone Star got cut despite having much better PM/TM than the Inter-American. It would be interesting to see the political history there.

Philly Amtrak Fan presents what would have been the most sensible route: "CHI-STL-KCY-Oklahoma City-Dallas/Ft. Worth with a split with one branch to Houston and one to San Antonio/Austin".

I wonder what they were thinking in 1979. It still seems like they made a deliberate effort in 1979 to kill Amtrak by slashing *stronger* routes and keeping *weaker* routes

 

Ironically in the case of the Pacific NW service, Amtrak kept the train with the higher PM/TM (EB) over the one with the weaker one (North Coast Hiawatha). In the report to Congress, the EB was the train with the lowest PM/TM among LD trains that was recommended to be kept. The report discusses specific circumstances as to why to keep them while recommending merging the Southwest Limited and San Francisco Zephyr (if they went by the report, the entire portion of the Southwest Limited west of KCY including Albuquerque would've been cut) and recommending cutting both the Inter-American and the Lone Star. 

 

Among the hit list, the LD routes that were spared were the Pioneer (until 1997), Cardinal, and Inter-American. Also, the SW Limited/SF Zephyr merge never happened and the suggested route from Utah to LAX via Vegas became the Desert Wind (although that died in 1997 as well). 

 

Until the BL was cancelled in 1995, no train that was actually cancelled after 1979 was not on Brock's list of being discontinued. Of the trains that did get cancelled, only the Lone Star had a PM/TM over 100 (and it was lower than the EB). I would say the Lone Star was probably the only "stronger" train that got canceled (the National Limited and Floridian were really low at the time). If we take the Texas trains out of the picture, you could say it was a decision to keep two of four trains between the National Limited (89), Pioneer (87), Floridian (74), and Cardinal (60). Everyone knows which two I would've kept. Certainly I don't see why you would need both the Pioneer and the Empire Builder. Of course, I would've kept the Pioneer instead of the EB (or truncated the EB west of MSP). Maybe I would've rerouted the National from IND to CIN to COL then to PGH to serve CIN and avoid the IND to COL branch which I believe was the biggest problem of the National Limited route.

Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Soon: Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#24 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,261 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 20 December 2015 - 02:34 AM

Looking at those 1977 reports, I'm realizing that the current tactic of the haters is to hide the avoidable cost numbers, which were readily available in the 1977 reports. Perhaps because they show so many routes generating a surplus. I don't see why Amtrak should stand for this; the avoidable cost numbers should be published as well as the ludicrous "fully allocated" numbers.

There's something else going on: Chicago-Laredo had a lower avoidable yearly cost than Chicago-Houston (probably it wasn't daily). North Coast Hiawatha had a lower avoidable yearly cost than Empire Builder (again it probably wasn't daily). I haven't checked the frequencies.

The report has a fabulous section near the end giving the true underlying passenger potential on all corridors, based on the sqrt( (city A pop) * (city B pop) ) / (distance)^1.33 model.The result (Figure A-1) shows the massive potential in Chicago-East Coast service -- as big as the potential in the NEC -- a potential *still* hasn't been realized due to stupid politicians. (Figure A-2, by contrast, is no good because it makes the fatal assumption that railroad infrastructure won't be improved.)

Armed with this analysis, I feel quite comfortable saying that speed and frequency improvements to NY-(intermediate points)-Chicago service are *more* important than *any* improvements on the NEC.

It would be very enlightening to do this again with current population rather than 1980 population projections. NY-Florida would probably look even better, and I'm not sure what would happen in other regions of the country. NY-Chicago would still look very good.

Edited by neroden, 20 December 2015 - 02:58 AM.

--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#25 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 20 December 2015 - 08:09 AM

My proposals for trying to save both the Inter-American, Lone Star, and National Limited (or as much as possible) routes:

 

Proposal 1:

Reroute the National Limited east of PGH to serve WAS on the current CL route (was proposed by Brock Adams to spin off BL)

Reroute the National Limited between IND and COL via CIN (avoid IND-COL trouble and make sure CIN is taken care of)

Extend the National Limited from KCY to HOU along the Lone Star route

Keep Inter-American as is

 

So the new National Limited/Lone Star would be WAS-PGH-COL-DAY-CIN-IND-STL-KCY-Wichita-Oklahoma City-DAL & Ft. Worth/HOU

 

The National Limited would no longer serve PGH-PHL-NYP while the Lone Star would no longer serve CHI-KCY

 

The BL would remain and the through cars to BAL/WAS would remain. 

 

Potential transfers:

BL and NL/LS at PGH (NY/PHL to southern Ohio/IND/Missouri/Texas or CHI/northern Ohio to WAS, which might be faster than the CHI-PHL-WAS leg of the BL)

 

NL/LS and SWL at KCY (for travel between WAS/PGH/southern Ohio/IND/STL and Albuquerque/LAX or CHI to Wichita/Oklahoma/HOU)

 

NL/LS and Inter-American at STL (for travel between HOU/Oklahoma/Wichita and CHI)

 

Proposal 2:

 

Reroute the National Limited east of PGH to serve WAS on the current CL route

Reroute the National Limited between IND and COL via CIN

Reroute the National Limited instead of going to KCY to go to HOU along the Inter-American route (merge the National Limited and Inter-American)

Reroute the Lone Star CHI-STL-KCY-then continue along the 1979 Lone Star route

 

So the new NL/I-A would be WAS-PGH-COL-CIN-IND-STL-Little Rock-DAL & Ft. Worth/Austin/SAS

 

The National Limited would no longer serve PGH-PHL-NYP while the Inter-American would no longer serve CHI-STL

 

The PGH transfer would still be in play

You could transfer from the NL-I/A at STL to go to KCY/Wichita/Oklahoma/HOU (the NL-I/A would serve DAL/Ft. Worth, Austin, and SAS directly).

Since this route would no longer serve KCY, there would no longer be a connection between the NL and SWL. The only way to get between the East and West Coasts would be via CHI.

 

If I couldn't do either, I'd probably keep the NL (with CIN and PGH-WAS), reroute the Lone Star via STL and cancel the Inter-American.

 

I certainly feel the NL via CIN would be important if the Cardinal was dropped. I could run the Cardinal CHI-IND-CIN only or reroute the Floridian to serve IND (it served Bloomington, IN in 1979) to allow a transfer at IND for CIN-CHI traffic. I'm not completely sold on the PGH/WAS branch and might want to keep the NL going to PHL/NYP although that is a duplicate branch with the BL and it would give some passengers a quicker trip to WAS.

 

So my 1979 LD system:

 

NEC-Florida (2): Silver Star (then 81/82) and Silver Meteor (then 83/84)

 

NEC-CHI (2): Broadway Limited (40/41, 440/441 to WAS) and Lake Shore Limited (48/49, 448/449)

 

CHI-Florida: Floridian (56/57)

 

NEC-NOL: Crescent (19/20)

 

CHI-NOL: Panama Limited (58/59)

 

Texas/Midwest/WAS (2): Some combo of National Limited (30/31), Lone Star (15/16), Inter-American (21/22) based upon above proposals

 

CHI-LAX: Southwest Limited (3/4)

 

CHI-SAC/Bay Area: San Francisco Zephyr (5/6)

 

SLC-PDX/SEA: Pioneer (25/26)

 

SLC-Vegas-LAX: Desert Wind (35/36, introduced October 1979)

 

NOL-LAX: Sunset Limited (1/2)

 

LAX-SEA: Coast Starlight (11/14)

 

Cardinal (50/51) only CHI-CIN (reroute to IND)

 

Empire Builder (7/8) only CHI-MSP

 

Remember this was before the 750 mile rule.

 

If you no longer count the Cardinal and EB as LD trains, I would have had 15 LD trains. Assuming we'd have an Auto Train today it would be one more than number of LD trains as we have today. Probably by 1995 I would've had to cut 1-2 as was the case in real life but it probably would've been the NL and/or Floridian. Maybe I could've cut the Desert Wind and introduced LAX-Vegas service instead.

 

Before the 1979 cuts, there were 19 (counting three New York-Florida trains).

 

After the dust settled in 1982, they had 16 LD trains (National Limited, Floridian, Lone Star, and North Coast Hiawatha were cut and Desert Wind was added) and lost many markets I would've kept (Columbus, Dayton, Louisville, Nashville, Wichita, and Oklahoma City, among others). It was 15 when they canceled the Cardinal before Congress made them bring it back. The Auto Train came (current version) came in 1983 and the CL split from the BL in 1986. 

 

The 1979 report recommended keeping only 9 (NINE!) LD trains and the Inter-American only CHI-STL. There would be no service between CHI and Texas, only one train from CHI to California, and only one train from NYP to Florida (they would've kept only the Silver Star and Palmetto to Savannah) which would mean that the Silver Star would've had all of the NYP-Florida traffic! In addition to losing the markets that did lose service they also would've eliminated service in Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Atlanta, and Dallas. Even though the BL would've been kept, even I would've thought that was extreme. I think the 1979 report was probably a drastic report and I'm sure Amtrak and Congress were negotiating through 1979 as to which of the trains on Brock's hit list would actually have been saved.


Edited by Philly Amtrak Fan, 20 December 2015 - 10:43 AM.

Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Soon: Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#26 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,309 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 20 December 2015 - 12:37 PM

The third train to Florida from New York was seldom a perennial affair. It was an on again, off again sort of thing which progressively became more "off" than "on" until it disappeared.

 

Interesting thing about the Brock proposal was that in general almost everyone believed that proposal to be DOA. Those were my early days of involvement in rail advocacy, having been in this country for less than two years back then. The issue was of saving some specific trains rather than really being worried about cut down to 9. Amtrak back then was bleeding money worse than almost any time after that, and a lot of equipment withdrawal with the advent of the new Superliner and Amleet, and a fleet of tired Heritage Cars was on the horizon, so everyone knew something had to give, and they also knew that the proposal was way beyond what was really necessary or plausible. The result at the end reflected more realistic handling of the situation.



#27 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 21 December 2015 - 07:40 AM

Looking at those 1977 reports, I'm realizing that the current tactic of the haters is to hide the avoidable cost numbers, which were readily available in the 1977 reports. Perhaps because they show so many routes generating a surplus. I don't see why Amtrak should stand for this; the avoidable cost numbers should be published as well as the ludicrous "fully allocated" numbers.

There's something else going on: Chicago-Laredo had a lower avoidable yearly cost than Chicago-Houston (probably it wasn't daily). North Coast Hiawatha had a lower avoidable yearly cost than Empire Builder (again it probably wasn't daily). I haven't checked the frequencies.

The report has a fabulous section near the end giving the true underlying passenger potential on all corridors, based on the sqrt( (city A pop) * (city B pop) ) / (distance)^1.33 model.The result (Figure A-1) shows the massive potential in Chicago-East Coast service -- as big as the potential in the NEC -- a potential *still* hasn't been realized due to stupid politicians. (Figure A-2, by contrast, is no good because it makes the fatal assumption that railroad infrastructure won't be improved.)

Armed with this analysis, I feel quite comfortable saying that speed and frequency improvements to NY-(intermediate points)-Chicago service are *more* important than *any* improvements on the NEC.

It would be very enlightening to do this again with current population rather than 1980 population projections. NY-Florida would probably look even better, and I'm not sure what would happen in other regions of the country. NY-Chicago would still look very good.

 

June 1977 timetables.org:

 

Both Texas trains ran daily.

http://www.timetable...70622&item=0052

 

EB was daily, NCH was dally until Sept. 7th, then three times/week beyond that (said so on the schedule)

http://www.timetable...70622&item=0053

 

http://www.timetable...70622&item=0054


Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Soon: Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#28 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,277 posts

Posted 21 December 2015 - 01:59 PM

PM/TM might be important but Revenue/TM might be even more important.  Then costs /TM and combine them and you get operating profit(loss) / TM.  Then of course there are total costs/TM Which includes but not limited to mileage charges, station rental & station keeping charges. Some of the other charges might be higher such as reservation costs that include more computer time for LD, multi train,  &  sleeper charges. 

A thought if station stopping costs at each station were assigned to by number of passengers then a metric could determine if that stop should be kept.

then if it costs more to keep station open than passenger revenue then a case can be made for closing the station.   EX:  Sanderson, Tx.


Edited by west point, 21 December 2015 - 02:00 PM.


#29 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,309 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 21 December 2015 - 02:14 PM

Actually mileage charges belong to the core cost sicne it is clearly identifiable with a specific train and has no reason to be allocated among multiple trains from a grossed up number covering all trains.



#30 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 09 May 2016 - 05:18 AM

PM/TM (and other) numbers for Q1 FY 2016 (Oct. Dec. 2015): http://www.fra.dot.g.../Details/L17387

 

Data listed in the PM/TM table (Table 5) are from Jan. 2014-Dec. 2015.

 

Another table I found interesting was "PERCENTAGE OF FULLY ALLOCATED OPERATING COSTS COVERED BY PASSENGER RELATED REVENUE". There are two versions, one including state revenue and one not including state revenue. The %'s for the LD trains in both tables are obviously the same.


Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Soon: Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#31 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,309 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 09 May 2016 - 08:00 AM

Interesting document. I find the detailed OTP statistics and the responsibility for such delays in Appendices A and B quite illuminating.

 

One trend seems to be that the Commuter Rail lines screw Amtrak trains way worse than any freight railroad host. Which sort of runs against the theory that if all railroads were owned by some government agency or the other passenger trains would do much better.

 

Yeah, the PM/TM table is very interesting too. I am amazed at the high numbers some of the single level trains rack up in spite of being somewhat more capacity constrained than the transons. The LSL and the Atlantic Coast Service trains stand out in this respect. Incidentally this is a significant change from the late 70s and early 80s when visibly the single level trains were much less crowded and PM/TM was lower in spite of there being more available seat miles than today. Wonder how that came about even in the face of much higher fares now.

 

Hey, thanks for finding this document Philly!



#32 ainamkartma

ainamkartma

    Lead Service Attendant

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts

Posted 09 May 2016 - 06:50 PM

 

 

One trend seems to be that the Commuter Rail lines screw Amtrak trains way worse than any freight railroad host. Which sort of runs against the theory that if all railroads were owned by some government agency or the other passenger trains would do much better.

 

 

Well, it is kind of a weird metric.  It seems to heavily penalize the hosts that control very short portions of the route, such as the NMDOT, which controls just 80 miles of the SWC route.  A very short (minutes!) delay per train can add up to very many "minutes/10,000 train miles".  Same with MNRR and MBTA, which each control very short sections of the LSL route.  The relative delay _per train_ (kind of a more interesting metric for me, at least) is much much smaller for these hosts than appears from the chart.

 

Ainam "lies, damn lies, and I forget how the rest of that goes" Kartma



#33 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,277 posts

Posted 10 May 2016 - 11:20 AM

So is PM / TM a measure of the average load on a train ?  The number can only be a good measure if the specific train has no constraints on available seats.  Wonder how many trains have enough available seats at least 90% of time ?



#34 Anderson

Anderson

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,245 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 11 May 2016 - 11:15 PM

Something that I'd like to kvetch about: Good grief, how long is it going to take Amtrak to come up with an avoidable cost metric?  At the risk of calling for Mica-management, there needs to be some sort of hard deadline on Amtrak to work something out (we can criticize what they come up with is...let's face it, plenty of us will do that) but I at least want a starting point.


Capitol Limited (7), CA Zephyr (4) Lake Shore Limited (1), Acela (2), NE Regional (2), Sliver Meteor (4)

Upcoming: Silver Meteor (1), Lake Shore Limited (1), SW Chief (2), MO River Runner (1), Texas Eagle (1)

Possibly Upcoming: Either Texas Eagle (1), Capitol Limited (1), Silver Meteor (2) or Texas Eagle (1), Capitol Limited (1), Silver Meteor (1)

#35 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,261 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 12:03 PM

Apparently Amtrak laid off its more competent accounting and projections people when they decided to ignore and not implement the PIPs.

Honestly, I don't know what Boardman was thinking. Things were going quite well and then they just decided to ignore a bunch of their own recommendations because, I don't know, manana?

The avoidable cost numbers are an important weapon in the fight for funding. Everything I've looked at says that, at this point, nearly all the Amtrak routes are profitable enterprises, and the savings from cancelling any one would range from minimal to negative. Amtrak's problem is that it is not large enough scale to cover its large fixed overhead with those profits. This is an argument which at least the *intelligent* Congressmen (a small subset, I know) should be able to understand, but it's hard for Amtrak to make the argument if Amtrak doesn't compute the numbers.
--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#36 Anderson

Anderson

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,245 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 26 May 2016 - 04:37 AM

And of course, while Amtrak has to include the fully-allocated numbers (IIRC) there's nothing saying they couldn't include other metrics such as avoidable costs (or at least costs freed of certain fixed or near-fixed overhead costs).


Capitol Limited (7), CA Zephyr (4) Lake Shore Limited (1), Acela (2), NE Regional (2), Sliver Meteor (4)

Upcoming: Silver Meteor (1), Lake Shore Limited (1), SW Chief (2), MO River Runner (1), Texas Eagle (1)

Possibly Upcoming: Either Texas Eagle (1), Capitol Limited (1), Silver Meteor (2) or Texas Eagle (1), Capitol Limited (1), Silver Meteor (1)

#37 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 20 November 2016 - 12:41 PM

Updated for Second Quarter 2016 (Jan-March):

http://www.fra.dot.g...25_gD_lRO_y2016


Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Soon: Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#38 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,261 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 20 November 2016 - 07:16 PM

Updated for Second Quarter 2016 (Jan-March):

http://www.fra.dot.g...25_gD_lRO_y2016

It's pathetic that they still don't have the avoidable cost numbers they were supposed to have 8 years ago.


--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#39 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,309 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 20 November 2016 - 07:30 PM

 

Updated for Second Quarter 2016 (Jan-March):

http://www.fra.dot.g...25_gD_lRO_y2016

It's pathetic that they still don't have the avoidable cost numbers they were supposed to have 8 years ago.

 

Maybe Moorman will fix that.



#40 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,277 posts

Posted 20 November 2016 - 09:10 PM

Updated for Second Quarter 2016 (Jan-March):
http://www.fra.dot.g...25_gD_lRO_y2016


Report is great best train of course is auto train but the 2nd best is the Lynchburg train. 340 PM / TM Really great.

Edited by west point, 20 November 2016 - 09:11 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users